What is wrong with America

[whelk]

I’ll give him British colonialism 

[Sir Ralph]

2 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I don't know about all of those but I know for a fact that some of them are blatant misinterpretations of what he said.

It was a tactic used by people from certain political view points to discredit him. In every circumstance you need to watch the video where he says it. What you will likely find is that he was a rationale (even if you don’t agree with all his views) and good debater. It’s unfortunate he was killed by some idiot who spent to much time reading bollocks on the internet.

[JohnnyShearer2.0]

12 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

Completely irrelevant to the point - muppets like King shouldn’t make false accusations.

in fact the king article is a good example of people that hugely took his comments out of context to make a point. 

Can you tell me why its completely irrelevant to the point?

 

[Weston Super Saint]

Apparently the shooter was turned in by his father.  Will he be claiming the $100,000 reward?  I'm going with yes.

[Holmes_and_Watson]

Beeb's 5 Live victim shamed Kirk.

"A lot of people found what he said highly inflammatory. We can't forget that piece of the jigsaw puzzle, can we? We can't just eulogise this man. You have to understand that, to understand...and it's no excuse, why certain people.. (pause) but this kind of rhetoric can inflamed tensions, can't it? We can't just brush that under carpet, when we look at him in the round.

A thrown in, and it really sounded like that "and it's no excuse". And starting down the sentence that was going to say that since he held the views he did, you can understand why certain people reacted.

Like a lot of folk, I wasn't familiar with him beyond the name coming up once in a while. I see there's a list above, of which at least one has been debunked.

Regardless of his views, this was an unjustifiable murder. Another been low point as they can't contain their dislike for a Trump ally.

The other day a celeb was a controversial figure according to them. The reason given? He'd met the vice president. Dreadful stuff.

[Sir Ralph]

5 minutes ago, Holmes_and_Watson said:

Beeb's 5 Live victim shamed Kirk.

"A lot of people found what he said highly inflammatory. We can't forget that piece of the jigsaw puzzle, can we? We can't just eulogise this man. You have to understand that, to understand...and it's no excuse, why certain people.. (pause) but this kind of rhetoric can inflamed tensions, can't it? We can't just brush that under carpet, when we look at him in the round.

A thrown in, and it really sounded like that "and it's no excuse". And starting down the sentence that was going to say that since he held the views he did, you can understand why certain people reacted.

Like a lot of folk, I wasn't familiar with him beyond the name coming up once in a while. I see there's a list above, of which at least one has been debunked.

Regardless of his views, this was an unjustifiable murder. Another been low point as they can't contain their dislike for a Trump ally.

The other day a celeb was a controversial figure according to them. The reason given? He'd met the vice president. Dreadful stuff.

If you go through nearly all of them won’t reflect the statement suggested . People with opposing views hated him because he often showed their arguments up for being unfounded. So they made crap up about him. I bet the muppet on Five Live didn’t even listen to him.

Edited 15 hours ago by Sir Ralph

[JohnnyShearer2.0]

3 minutes ago, Holmes_and_Watson said:

Beeb's 5 Live victim shamed Kirk.

"A lot of people found what he said highly inflammatory. We can't forget that piece of the jigsaw puzzle, can we? We can't just eulogise this man. You have to understand that, to understand...and it's no excuse, why certain people.. (pause) but this kind of rhetoric can inflamed tensions, can't it? We can't just brush that under carpet, when we look at him in the round.

A thrown in, and it really sounded like that "and it's no excuse". And starting down the sentence that was going to say that since he held the views he did, you can understand why certain people reacted.

Like a lot of folk, I wasn't familiar with him beyond the name coming up once in a while. I see there's a list above, of which at least one has been debunked.

Regardless of his views, this was an unjustifiable murder. Another been low point as they can't contain their dislike for a Trump ally.

The other day a celeb was a controversial figure according to them. The reason given? He'd met the vice president. Dreadful stuff.

A horrible murder indeed. 

 

[whelk]

8 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

he often showed their arguments up for being unfounded

If you are a religious fundamentalist craving a way of life you assume God wanted, it is very difficult for any common ground to be found with LGBT and others. So not really unfounded, just never the twain shall meet

[iansums]

20 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Apparently the shooter was turned in by his father.  Will he be claiming the $100,000 reward?  I'm going with yes.

Another life ruined

[iansums]

8 minutes ago, whelk said:

If you are a religious fundamentalist craving a way of life you assume God wanted, it is very difficult for any common ground to be found with LGBT and others. So not really unfounded, just never the twain shall meet

He did though, he would completely discredit their arguments. Perhaps they hated him because he made them look so bloody stupid.

[Sir Ralph]

11 minutes ago, whelk said:

If you are a religious fundamentalist craving a way of life you assume God wanted, it is very difficult for any common ground to be found with LGBT and others. So not really unfounded, just never the twain shall meet

Again I would suggest the evidence is the key. What’s not acceptable is people having a reasonable opinion, carefully articulating it in a non hateful way and then being called a racist or homophobe. It’s really boring. The left really hated him because he took their arguments apart

Edited 14 hours ago by Sir Ralph

[whelk]

2 minutes ago, iansums said:

He did though, he would completely discredit their arguments. Perhaps they hated him because he made them look so bloody stupid.

So if I said to him I am gay, how does he comeback with something that discredits me?

[Sir Ralph]

3 minutes ago, whelk said:

So if I said to him I am gay, how does he comeback with something that discredits me?

I don’t think debates work like that. He didn’t discredit people - he explained his position. Like I said watch his videos. You can either assume what he was like based on trolls or watch the videos and be more informed (I say this in a non patronising way). 

Edited 14 hours ago by Sir Ralph

[revolution saint]

3 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

The left really hated him because he took their arguments apart

That’s quite subjective. Can’t pretend to be an expert on Kirk but I watched a clip of him a few months ago and didn’t think he did that good a job of debating and fell into the old whataboutery arguments that are fairly typical. All subjective though.

Just for the avoidance of doubt, he didn’t deserve to be murdered for his views though and I’ll happily condemn that.

[benjii]

Seems like this guy might be a part of a right wing group that follows Nick Fuentes; another alt-right looney who found Kirk too moderate.

[This guy has also donated to Trump] [EDIT: maybe not, could be a different person.] and is from the classic gun-tootin' family.

Massive FAR LEFTIST!!!

Edited 14 hours ago by benjii

[Sir Ralph]

2 minutes ago, revolution saint said:

That’s quite subjective. Can’t pretend to be an expert on Kirk but I watched a clip of him a few months ago and didn’t think he did that good a job of debating and fell into the old whataboutery arguments that are fairly typical. All subjective though.

Just for the avoidance of doubt, he didn’t deserve to be murdered for his views though and I’ll happily condemn that.

Ok it’s subjective but do you agree he wasn’t some mad racist, homophobe facist that some suggested?

[revolution saint]

1 minute ago, Sir Ralph said:

Ok it’s subjective but do you agree he wasn’t some mad racist, homophobe facist that some suggested?

I don’t know enough about him so I’m not going to give an ill informed opinion on that. 
I do agree with him that these kind of tragedies along with high school shootings are the price America has to pay for lax gun control laws though.

[badgerx16]

1 minute ago, Sir Ralph said:

Ok it’s subjective but do you agree he wasn’t some mad racist, homophobe facist that some suggested?

I don't think he was a 'mad' anything, he was sane and knew exactly what he was doing and how he wanted to present himself, but having watched several of his debates and interviews I feel that he held and propounded many strong views on race, religion, and sexuality that I strongly disagree with. I think he was very careful to position himself just inside the 'acceptable' band of the right wing of US Nationalist Christian politics, and anybody who is so firmly behind the Second Amendment is lacking in judgement, ( IMO ).

Nobody deserves to die like that, but he was deliberately provocative in a world where the outer reaches of the Internet and SM breed lunatic conspiracies, and incite violent reactions from the gullibla and easily led. Under Trump's leadership the US is rapidly approaching a crossroads, and the risk of more acts like this are very real, from both sides of the political divide unless the more sane leaders on both sides can gain a degree of control.

[rallyboy]

13 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

Ok it’s subjective but do you agree he wasn’t some mad racist, homophobe facist that some suggested?

You were clearly a huge fan of his views on race, guns, religion, abortion etc - you may have to just accept that others disagree.

[Sir Ralph]

1 minute ago, badgerx16 said:

I don't think he was a 'mad' anything, he was sane and knew exactly what he was doing and how he wanted to present himself, but having watched several of his debates and interviews I feel that he held and propounded many strong views on race, religion, and sexuality that I strongly disagree with. I think he was very careful to position himself just inside the 'acceptable' band of the right wing of US Nationalist Christian politics, and anybody who is so firmly behind the Second Amendment is lacking in judgement, ( IMO ).

Nobody deserves to die like that, but he was deliberately provocative in a world where the outer reaches of the Internet and SM breed lunatic conspiracies, and incite violent reactions from the gullibla and easily led. Under Trump's leadership the US is rapidly approaching a crossroads, and the risk of more acts like this are very real, from both sides of the political divide unless the more sane leaders on both sides can gain a degree of control.

I think we both come at it from different view points due to our preferred political positions. I would agree with more of his views than you would, maybe compared to a liberal who I believe you would more likely support and I would disagree with. This is the world of opinions and nothing scarier than that. 
 

I think the USs current position isn’t just because of Trump. It’s both the right and the left and the lacking of willing to listen to other people’s opinions and tolerate them. 

[Sir Ralph]

7 minutes ago, rallyboy said:

You were clearly a huge fan of his views on race, guns, religion, abortion etc - you may have to just accept that others disagree.

I agree with a reasonable amount of what he said yes. I don’t agree with everything but I don’t get offended by the things I wouldn’t agree with him on. I accept that some others disagree, whilst others agree with him.
 

The point was put that he made racist, homophobic and other awful statements which I think has been shown is mainly misinformation. The point from this is don’t just dismiss somebody cause you read a headline and disagree with them and because some idiot on the internet said it. I’ve been guilty of it before but look a bit deeper before taking a view.

Edited 14 hours ago by Sir Ralph

[badgerx16]

"The main purpose for girls to go to University is to get an MRS degree", Charlie Kirk.

( MRS means 'Mrs' - find their future husband ).

Edited 14 hours ago by badgerx16

[whelk]

I have known some great Christians who have genuine love and compassion - love the sinner, hate the sin etc. and you can see the kindness in them.

Unfortunately the Republican version rarely comes across as Christlike and more fundamental nut - God wants me to have guns etc - a strong faith but not really the message of the gospel. I don’t think any true Christian would align themselves with Trump who has some of the worst characteristics known to man.

Edited 12 hours ago by whelk

[hypochondriac]

29 minutes ago, benjii said:

Seems like this guy might be a part of a right wing group that follows Nick Fuentes; another alt-right looney who found Kirk too moderate.

[This guy has also donated to Trump] [EDIT: maybe not, could be a different person.] and is from the classic gun-tootin' family.

Massive FAR LEFTIST!!!

Active participant in antifa discord servers apparently. Considered Kirk a fascist. Sounds pretty far left to me regardless of what his family are.

[LVSaint]

2 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

 

The point was put that he made racist, homophobic and other awful statements which I think has been shown is misinformation. 

Dig a little deeper. Well, it's all out there, easy to find. You can cherry pick a couple of times he might have been taken a little out of context, but he really was a screwy little twerp, but a smart one who knew how to tap into this fucked up society and feed and enforce Trump's wholly unsavory narrative. 

[hypochondriac]

7 minutes ago, whelk said:

I have known some great Christians who have genuine love and compassion - love the sinner, hate the sinner etc and you can see the kindness in them.

Unfortunately the Republican version rarely comes across as Christlike and more fundamental nut - God wants me to have guns etc - a strong faith but not really the message of the gospel. I don’t think any true Christian would align themselves with Trump who has some of the worst characteristics known to man.

I don't disagree. I don't think either political party in America really has any business with aligning themselves with Christian values.

[Sir Ralph]

2 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I don't disagree. I don't think either political party in America really has any business with aligning themselves with Christian values.

Out of interest why do you say that?

[badgerx16]

"Far left" or "Far right" really doesn't matter; lunatics lacking social skills, and with Constitutionally guaranteed access to lethal weapons, are being fed bullshit conspiracies by Social Media provocateurs to generate support for borderline political ideologies.

[badgerx16]

22 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

I think we both come at it from different view points due to our preferred political positions. I would agree with more of his views than you would, maybe compared to a liberal who I believe you would more likely support .....

When Kirk referred to somebody as a 'liberal' he meant it to be derogatory.

[Sir Ralph]

Just now, badgerx16 said:

When Kirk referred to somebody as a 'liberal' he meant it to be derogatory.

In your opinion….

[badgerx16]

Just now, Sir Ralph said:

In your opinion….

And his.

[hypochondriac]

9 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

Out of interest why do you say that?

Because many people who are hardcore supporters of both and who claim to be big Christians frequently show support for and act in ways that I consider to be very unchristian.

[hypochondriac]

4 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

And his.

A liberal in America has a different meaning to the ones over here.

[Sir Ralph]

8 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

And his.

If you have resorted to saying he used the word “liberal” a way you perceive to be derogatory, that probably says a lot about how terrible Kirk was 😆I never heard him really say anything derogatory. All there is broad allegations with no real substance (at least consistent substance). 

Edited 13 hours ago by Sir Ralph

[badgerx16]

2 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

A liberal in America has a different meaning to the ones over here.

I know. They are all "Far left" Wokeists.

[badgerx16]

1 minute ago, Sir Ralph said:

If you have resorted to saying he used the word “liberal” a way you perceive to be derogatory, that probably says a lot about how terrible Kirk was 😆I never heard him really say anything derogatory. All there is broad allegations, no real substance (at least consistent substance). 

Listen to Trump's use of the word, or any other of his prominent Cabinet members. Kirk was one of the main people creating the Trumpist ideology.

May I add, anybody celebrating his death is a complete fucktard.

[hypochondriac]

4 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

I know. They are all "Far left" Wokeists.

Not sure if you're being serious or not but liberal in the UK typically refers to classical liberals which is more associated with centrism. Liberalism in America is indeed more associated with being further left and progressives. 

[Sir Ralph]

3 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

Listen to Trump's use of the word, or any other of his prominent Cabinet members. Kirk was one of the main people creating the Trumpist ideology.

May I add, anybody celebrating his death is a complete fucktard.

Again I disagree he used it in a derogatory way. Going back to the point if this is perceived use of a word is being highlighted as one of his bad attributes he sounds a lot nicer than 99% of the people on here (me included).

[iansums]

43 minutes ago, rallyboy said:

You were clearly a huge fan of his views on race, guns, religion, abortion etc - you may have to just accept that others disagree.

You do realise that it’s possible to agree with some of his views but disagree with others?

[whelk]

5 minutes ago, iansums said:

You do realise that it’s possible to agree with some of his views but disagree with others?

That’s how I view Hypo

[badgerx16]

9 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Not sure if you're being serious or not but liberal in the UK typically refers to classical liberals which is more associated with centrism. Liberalism in America is indeed more associated with being further left and progressives. 

I was summarising Trump's words.

[hypochondriac]

5 minutes ago, whelk said:

That’s how I view Hypo

I'm cool with that as long as you don't try to murder me with a rifle.

[whelk]

2 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I'm cool with that as long as you don't try to murder me with a rifle.

I don’t feel that strongly about VAT on school fees

[Ted Bates Statue]

4 hours ago, Saint86 said:

Surely this has to act as a warning to America to tone down the rhetoric? They'll end up fully down the path of tit for tat political killings otherwise.

I'm still too preoccupied with the massive irony of a gun rights supporter being shot to death to contribute much to the discussion, but on the news yesterday it was suggested the only way of preventing this is to have politicians both sides of the divide unite in condemning this kind of violence. I believe this is how UK politicians dealt with the deaths of Jo Cox and David Amess, and most of them would do well to bear in mind that extremism tends not to discriminate too much before putting their foot in mouth (I can't speak for those at Local Government level though - there's always one or two).

The trouble is over the pond, it's taboo to admit that guns are the common factor in countless pointless deaths so they have to come up with other excuses, like democrats, or RFK blaming video games, drugs and social media earlier in the week. Anything to avoid the elephant in the room.

[trousers]

29 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I'm cool with that as long as you don't try to murder me with a rifle.

That's fairly narrow exclusion criteria...

[JohnnyShearer2.0]

55 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

If you have resorted to saying he used the word “liberal” a way you perceive to be derogatory, that probably says a lot about how terrible Kirk was 😆I never heard him really say anything derogatory. All there is broad allegations with no real substance (at least consistent substance). 

So you've never heard him say anything derogatory? That's your opinion then. I have to disagree he's said plenty.

[Sir Ralph]

21 minutes ago, JohnnyShearer2.0 said:

So you've never heard him say anything derogatory? That's your opinion then. I have to disagree he's said plenty.

Give me evidence please. Thats a general comment. There are plenty of videos of him out there to prove your point. 

Edited 12 hours ago by Sir Ralph

[Holmes_and_Watson]

24 minutes ago, trousers said:

That's fairly narrow exclusion criteria...

Although points for hoisting that grand piano above Hypo's door. 🙂

[The Kraken]

4 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

Give me evidence. Thats a general comment. 

“It's worth it to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year, so that we can have the Second Amendment to protect our other God-given rights...That is a prudent deal.”
 

Out of interest, what do you make of his guns statement? Some might call that a derogatory thing to say.

[RedArmy]

40 minutes ago, Ted Bates Statue said:

 

The trouble is over the pond, it's taboo to admit that guns are the common factor in countless pointless deaths so they have to come up with other excuses, like democrats, or RFK blaming video games, drugs and social media earlier in the week. Anything to avoid the elephant in the room.

Yep they are a backwards nation when it comes to guns. 
 

I’ve even seen them in the past claim without irony that it was a gun free zone and shouldn’t have been able to happen. 
 

Brilliant, that’s like having a ‘no getting wet zone’ in the middle of the fucking ocean.